Sunday, 30 November 2008

BBC Jersey.

The poll is now closed and the result is resoundingly conclusive. 74% of you would like Senator Syvret to be a guest on the talkback show to discuss the report made by the Howard League of Penal Reform. Will the local BBC give you/me what we want? somehow I doubt it very much!!

According to Senator Syvret he has written proof the editor of local BBC agreed to have him on as a guest and then went on to renege on the deal. I believe it was in order to give the elections some coverage. So how did they cover the elections (on talkback) in a fair and balanced way?

The week before last they had the two candidates from St John as guests, last week they had the three candidates from St Brelade No 1. So out of, I think it was, 63 candidates they allowed 5 of them two hours FREE airtime. How is that fair and balanced? what about the other 58 candidates? I'm sure they would have loved the opportunity of 2 FREE hours of advertising and electioneering for votes!!

Worse still somebody has come up with that idea and got it passed!! Here's the choice. option 1. Do we have a talkback programme on a subject that has seen a manager in child welfare and a minister for health and social services lose their jobs after blowing the whistle on what they desribed as, and the HLPR described as illegal and abusive treatment to our most vunerable..........children. Possibly one of the most important reports we have ever had published, a report that could possibly totally vindicate Senator Syvret and Simon Bellwood and affects the whole island's population. A subject that almost everybody will have an opinion on and would stimulate a lot of thought, discussion and more importantly offer some much needed ANSWERS.

Option 2. Do we have a talkback show where the guests might talk about issues that affect only those who live in their parish, mains drains, speed limits on certain roads, unruly kids in certain area's and the Battle of flowers float therefore alienating a vast majority of the listeners who don't live in that Parish, also might be seen as giving favour to some of the candidates by not including them all.

So somebody has gone with option 2 who is this person? under what basis did they come to this decision? How can it be described as fair and impartial? How can it be deemed as something that deserves to be in the public domain over such an important report?

Senator Syvret has come in for some criticism (on the talkback show) for it being "his watch" while all this alleged abuse was going on. He phoned the show up with the offer to appear as a guest and answer all his critics, so far this appears to have been ignored by the BBC or Bridget Broadcasting Corporation.

I have lost almost any respect I had for the BBC and I strongly believe our local BBC have "gone native" I have repeatedly e-mailed Matthew Price to ask why they won't hold a talkback show with Senator Syvret as a guest to discuss the HLPR's report, he hasn't reponded to the e-mails. This does nothing for the BBC's credibility and can only add fuel to the fire the local BBC have "gone native".

A cracking Talkback show would, in my opinion, be Simon Bellwood, Stuart Syvret on with any of the following, Jimmy (GST28) Perchard, Mike (GST28) Vibert, Joe Kennedy, Frank Walker, Ben Shenton to name but a few. This show could answer a lot of questions, clear up alot of confusion and possibly expose some politicians as liars, complicit in covering up the truth, seriously negecting our children, etc. etc.

Seventy four percent of you, 76 out of a hundred believe this show should happen and thank you for voting in the poll. In order to give the local BBC an idea of where their credibilty lies with the online population I am going to ask you to vote again on what you think of the BBC. please vote, the more votes there are, the more they will have to take heed!!! You can vote on more than one option as there are four.

Friday, 21 November 2008

Breaking Point

Regular reader(s) of my Blog will be aware of the violence and Bullying my son has been subjected to. The last episode I Blogged about which is here My son and I recieved some very welcome support from Bloggers and the general public for which we were/are most grateful for.

You might remember I was told by the school an "incident" had occured that "incident" was five kids kicking my son repeatedly whilst he was on the ground. One witness, I have since found out, said one of the kids were kicking my son "like a football". Two of my son's attackers were suspended (given a couple of days off school) because others were kicking my son from behind, although they were the only people behind my son it was said my son could not see them so couldn't prove it was them kicking him so they recieved no sanction.

Please read the link above in order to get an understanding of the situation which will help to bring this entry into context.

Yesterday I recieved a call from the school telling me my son had been involved in "an incident" the "incident" was described to me as "a bit of fun" a "bit of mucking about" "A friend" of my son's had scraped him a bit with a pen so I said something along the lines of "well these things happen, thanks for letting me know"

My son returned home after the school day and showed me his neck. There was, what one might describe as, a 6 inch abrasion, slash mark, across his neck! which looked pretty red raw baring in mind this was approxiametly 4 hours after "the incident".

Naturally (as any parent would be) I was somewhat alarmed and proceeded to ask my son what had happened? He told me he was chatting with his cousin in the playground and this kid, came out of nowhere, from behind and slashed me across the neck with his pen. I said "What...... as a bit of fun"? he said "well it was fun for him but not for me" I said was it "a friend" of yours? he said "well not a friend but he doesn't bully me as much as the others do" I said "the teacher told me he was a friend of yours" my son said "well i've not get many friends and he doesn't bully me as much as some others so didn't want to lose the chance of making a friend and if I told the teacher he wasn't my friend that might have got him in trouble and there would be no chance of him becoming my friend and I didn't want to get him into trouble"

I phoned the teacher this morning and, to cut a long story short, got the same old "party line" "We take these "incidents" seriously". We have explained to the child he COULD be up for a charge of serious assault. He COULD be reported to the police, He COULD have to go to a parish hall enquiry, he COULD go to court. So with all that COULD be done, I asked "what have you done"? to which he replied "suspended him" (gave him an afternoon off school).. Yes an afternoon off school, you really couldn't make this lot up!

I asked what kind of a pen was it because to inflict that kind of injury it must have taken a fair bit of force? He said "I agree but it was the top part of the pen and it was a little bit rough around the edge"

During the phonecall I said "since all this COULD happen, and you take these incidents seriously, naturally you took photo's of my son's injury"? Suprise, suprise nobody had!

Another alaming factor in all of this, it appears the child only recieved threats of what COULD happen to him, not what effect his actions could have on his victim. It doesn't appear the time has been taken out to explain to this child the detremental effects, the emotional damge and harm it might cause. In order to give the child some kind of understanding as to why this sort of behaviour is unacceptable. He's just been told he COULD get into trouble and was given the afternoon off.

Then we must look at the school's statistics. This "incident" was sold to me as "a bit of mucking around" "a bit of fun" Where in my opinion it is bullying, or a serious assault. How will it be logged? under what heading? Statistically speaking it would be more beneficial to call it "a bit of fun" and keep it out of the bullying statistics.

What also confused me somewhat is the "policy" I was told about the last time my son was involved in an "incident". I asked for the names of my son's attackers and I was told it was not "policy" to give other pupils names to parents. When I asked who's "policy" is this? Is it the school's policy or the education departments? to which they couldn't (or wouldn't) give me an answer. After a couple of days of me persuing this answer, it came about, it was "data protection". Then why with this most recent "incident" did the teacher voluntarily give me the name of my son's attacker, surely that puts him in breach of the data protection doesn't it?

Bullying, in my opinion, is rife in our school's. Our children (Bully's and victims) are being failed by hopelessly inadequate, non existent poilcies and self regulated statistics, a non independent complaints proceedure and civil servants and ministers not held to account.

My son feels because somebody doesn't bully him as much as the others that this person could be a friend and feels the need to protect the child. He believes if he tells the truth it will only make matters worse for himself.

I as a parent feel I am sending my son into harms way every day he goes to school, but if I take him out of school for his own safety I'll be prosecuted!! When I try contacting Mario Lundy he doesn't reply to my e-mails or return any of my phone-calls. All the while I am dreading my phone ringing to be told my son has been involved in "an incident" only one day it is going to be from the hospital. Maybe it might be from the police to say my son is being held on an attempted murder charge after finally reached breaking point, after all there is only so much a child can take and I am not only amazed but very proud my son has been able to endure so much violence against him without resorting to violence himself but like I said we all have a breaking point, and the other breaking point doesn't bare thinking about!

Thursday, 13 November 2008

Divided you stand united you'll fall?

The handling of Lenny Harper's investigation of the of the HDLG scandal has been bought into question, some might argue it has been discredited by his replacement Mr.Warcup and our oligarchy. Graham Power has been suspended from duty (as a neutral act) for, as far as I am aware, his handling of the investigation. Senator Stuart Syvret was releaved of his post as health minister for whatever reason you want to believe. Was it because he, like Mr. Harper and Mr. Power was attempting to bring some justice and closure to victims of abuse or was it because of his conduct and demoralising States employees?

All three men, to my reckoning, are taking a bit of a beating from certain parts of the media and our oligarchy. The credibility of all three men is now almost certainly questionable at least to those who have no access to the internet.

The reasons and timing of the two press conferences yesterday (Wed 13th Nov) is also very questionable. Mr Harper appears to be somewhat bemused as to why the Police called a press conference which in his words told us very little that we didn't already know, and possibly only reinforced what Mr.Harper had been telling us all along, there was not enough evidence to conduct a murder inquiry. It also appeared to me that Mr.Harper might believe there is some credibility in Senator Syvret's allegations the press conference was called to smother, what might be, for our oligarchy, a very damming report from the Howard League of Penal Reform due to be published tomorrow.

Senator Syvret was sacked, Lenny Harper retired and was not asked, to the best of my knowledge, to stay on as a consultant and Graham Power has now been suspended. All three have something in common, they were trying to bring the guilty to justice and offer some kind of closure to any victims, if indeed they could ever get any kind of complete closure. All three men are no longer in their posts and will no longer be privvy to the information, evidence or witness testimony they once were.

It looks to me that the States of Jersey have come out with an all out political and media war against these men and the States of Jersey look to be showing a united front. Individually I would summise none of these men would stand much of a chance against the entire "establishment"! But if all three got together along with their, I'm sure vast, media and influential political contacts they would then stand a better than average chance of exposing our goverment for what they really are and give the abuse survivors some hope.

If anything needs to be learnt by our last "democratic" election where the opposition got more votes than the establishment it is this. For as long as there is division those divided will perish, they will be defeated by "the establishment".

Senator Syvret, Lenny Harper and Graham Power now need to join ranks and piece together their own assault on this horrible dictatorship, go on the offensive, blow the whistle, expose the guilty. Put as much fear into our goverment as our goverment puts into us.

I can only hope, behind the scenes, the three men are uniting, working together because until that happens I reckon they are dead in the water along with any hope of the victims seeing any justice. This whole episode just reeks of that ever so familiar stench of goverment cover up. The only chance any of us have is if there is some kind of unity against this stink.
I know national and international journalists read my blog, if any of you are worth your salt, don't just look for a few soundbites and a little bit of sensationalism. All you need to do is scratch a little bit below the surface start investigating, expose our goverment expose our goverments relationship with our media. Outside Journalists looks to be about the only hope us islanders have of being liberated from this, Oligarchy, dictatorship, occupying force. Call it what you will but it certainly isn't a "democracy" .
I think the writing is on the wall, if Syvret, Power and Harper go on the backfoot individually then that is where they'll stay along with the rest of us! Unite, Gather your many supporters launch your own attack on our Oligarchy and you, along with the rest of us will stand a chance.

Monday, 3 November 2008

Senator Terry (GST28) Le Main

So just what exactly is Senator Terry (GST28) Le Main so scared of? Why is he so keen to silence Senator Syvret? Why did he shout Senator Syvret's Christmas speech down last year? these are all questions our elected "represenatives" should be asking him, so should our local media!

It appears our local BBC are inadequately funded and resourced, and appears they are questions none of our local "journalists" have thought to ask him. Although to the best of my knowledge nothing of Senator Terry (GST28) Le Main's attempts to silence Senator Syvret's Christmas speech has been reported on our local BBC news despite CTV, JEP and Channel 103 giving it a bit of a mention.

I have recently been in e-mail contact with Senator Terry (GST28) Le main in an attempt to get an interview with him on camera where I could ask him these questions. He refuses to give me an interview and also denies saying he is in fear of Senator Syvret, or his speech, as published in the JEP. He also denies threatening me and my family and like I have said in one of my e-mails to him "one of us is a liar"

Although I have never asked a question of any of our elected "representatives" that any concerned parent or citizen of Jersey should deserve an answer to, alas as regular readers will know, I haven't been very successfull.

Anyway here is my e-mail correspondance with Senator Terry (GST28) Le Main.

Mr.Le Main.

I have copied and pasted this statement from Senator Syvret's Blogsite. ("Senator Terry – Tel Boy – Le Main – used car salesman extraordinaire – has been secretly organising a claque of oligarchy Senators who wish to take it upon themselves to prevent me, as Father of the House, from delivering the Christmas speech").

Could you please let me know if there is any truth in this?


Dear VFC.
Thank you... I have not been secretly organising a claque of obligarchy Senators because in that case why was Senator Syvret as one of the 12 Senators or Senators elect copied in to all the emails in which the 12 Senators ( including Senator Syvret ) are invited to attend a meeting to discuss the matter of who delivers the speech on behalf of the Senators...this is democracy in which just like the Connetables did some years ago the Senators will decide or otherwise who delivers the Christmas speech on their behalf... is this secrecy as claimed by Senator Syvret... I think not...

Mr Le Main.

As you have threatened to sue me if I publish any lies or defame you in any way on my Blog and also told me "if I care about my wife and children I should watch where I poke my nose", which I also take as a direct threat. I would like once more to offer you the opportunity to give me an interview on camera not only to explain these statements to your electorate and myself but also to answer a few more questions.

I believe in a democratic society our elected representatives ought to be answerable to their electorate. Unfortunately it appears our local media have come up a bit short when it comes to any real indepth "journalism"

As I am sure you are aware you have come in for a great deal of criticism not only for "shouting down" Senator Syvret's attempt to aknowledge alleged child abuse victims and catastrophic failings by the States of Jersey in protecting them, but now you wish to prevent him from giving his "Father of the house" Christmas speech all together!

You have been quoted as saying you and a few others are "in fear of what he might say" but have not elaborated in any way what you and others are "in fear of".

In order to produce a fair and balanced Blog on you, I would ask you would reconsider your threats and agree to an interview on camera. I have absolutely no wish to lie about, or defame, you in any way. I would just like to give you the opportunity to answer the questions that are being asked of you by your electorate and maybe explain, what appears to be, your very un democratic behaviour.


What are you saying... " if I care about my wife and children I should watch where I poke my nose " where on earth did you get this from... certainly not from me and that is untruthful....I never ever said that and you know it... and you state that " I have been quoted that I am in fear of what he might say " ie Syvret....just to say this is again untruthful because I have never said such a thing or do I fear this awful man seems to many people in Jersey that Syvret with his lies and untruths and character assasinations of senior civil servants etc that he is medically unwell or otherwise .... that is the view of many people, its not mine but know very well I only threatened you in regard to " defaming me on your blog with untruths or otherwise " I did advise you that in a democracy you can say what you like in regard to my public office policies, decisions and actions but any personal attack, lies or untruths will be dealt with appropriately with my Lawyer and the Court....just like it happened to a certain gentleman some years ago whom the Royal Court jailed for 48 hours...

Don't be silly VFC. I have no intention of being filmed or even meeting with you and I would be grateful if you ceased emailing me as we have nothing in common to discuss not even in the name of " Democracy "

Mr.Le Main.

I Maintain your words to me on the phone were "if you care about your family, you know, your wife and kids you should be carefull where you poke your nose". I think it might be safe to say one of us is a liar.

As for being quoted as saying " I have been quoted that I am in fear of what he might say " ie Syvret....just to say this is again untruthful because I have never said such a thing or do I fear this awful man Syvret. maybe this might jog your memory. "there are quite a few of us who fear that he intends to use the speech to say certain things".

That does look to me that you and others are in fear! I grant you it did come from the JEP so might not hold a lot of credibility and they may have misquoted you then perhaps that is something you need to take up with them.

I am sorry you are denying your electorate the opportunity to be given any explanation as to your, what appears to be, bizzare behaviour in the continual attempts in silencing Senator Syvret.

As for having nothing in common with eachother, I couldn't agree more! one of us is seriously misguided and completely out of touch with who needs representation in the states on top of one of us being a liar.

As you know I shall be doing a Blog on you and see it as being "Democratic". Should I unwittingly defame you or publish anything that might be deemed as untrue, rather than having to live under the fear of being dragged through the courts and threatened with being sued. Could I ask if I e-mail you the Blog as soon as it is published, you have a look at it and alert me of any defemation or untruths and I will happily remove any offending material? There really is no need to be so threatening. I have absolutely no desire to defame or lie about you and am only trying to give the electorate a clearer picture of the poeople they elected.

As for e-mailing you, I am sorry but that is my "Democratic right" and I shall continue to do so if I have any democratic questions I believe deserve an answer from my democratically elected representatives. I also believe you are bound by your ministerial code of conduct 5) where it states "Elected members should at all times treat other members of the states, officers and members of the public with respect and courtesy and without malice, notwithstanding the disagreements on issues and policy which are a normal part of the political process"

To the best of my knowledge I have treated you with nothing less than proffessional courtesy and would thank you to treat me likewise.

Well that appears to be where our e-mail correspondance has ended as he has not replied. So I still don't know what he might be scared of i.e. Senator Syvret's speech, if indeed he is scared as he says to me that he isn't, according to the JEP he says he is, and one of us is a liar!
I suppose I should have asked him what "it seems to many people in Jersey that Syvret with his lies and untruths and character assasinations of senior civil servants etc that he is medically unwell or otherwise" Medically unwell or otherwise? otherwise what? otherwise he isn't medically unwell? and what "medical" condition could he have?